If the quad-core chip allows for the processor to use less overall power than the dual-core Cortex-A9 by completing tasks faster then I say it makes sense.

True, but the addition of more cores assumes that software can distribute tasks across the cores. Just like the difference in i7 and i5 processors. If the application is not multi-threaded, then there is no difference. So, my assumption is that iOS wasn't designed for this kind of multi-threaded environment. And certainly no current apps can take advantage. Now maybe I am wrong about the way iOS is written, but it would seem to me that you would need an iOS update to come with a processor core change in order to take advantage, but as I said, I could be wrong.

True, but the addition of more cores assumes that software can distribute tasks across the cores. Just like the difference in i7 and i5 processors. If the application is not multi-threaded, then there is no difference. So, my assumption is that iOS wasn't designed for this kind of multi-threaded environment. And certainly no current apps can take advantage. Now maybe I am wrong about the way iOS is written, but it would seem to me that you would need an iOS update to come with a processor core change in order to take advantage, but as I said, I could be wrong.

There was evidence found in iOS 5.1 betas that show support for 4 cores.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Not exactly. I have an i7 and when I bought it a while ago there was also an i5 available and they were both Quad core. The difference between the two was that the i7 had hyperthreading and that's an Intel only thing, which basically doubles the cores, giving you 8 virtual cores instead of 4 actual cores.

Just give us an onboard USB port and expand the iOS USB and bluetooth API to allow more devices to work with it (like mouse for Remote Desktop connections, Gamepads for gaming, bluetooth api for data exchange for custom I/O apps, etc). That would make a lot of developers happy and users when the apps start rolling in taking advantage of the new APIs.

No. You're going to get an improved Home button and a smoother-feeling volume rocker. Your demands are too much for Apple to handle.

Each of these is currently available and Apple is technologically able to give us each of this things. Right now. In the new iPad HD.

I'm thinking "iPad HD" is a pretty good call for what Apple will actually name it. It makes a clear, easily grasped distinction between it and the iPad 2, particularly useful if Apple does, in fact, keep selling that model at a lower price point. iPad for less money, iPad HD if you want to splurge.

They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.

You need to improve your imagination, there are many uses for iPad beyond what is current permitted.

I believe that you are addressing the wrong person. I am well aware of the many uses that an iPad can be used for and there are certainly many more uses to come. I already hook up Midi Keyboards to my iPad via USB and sometimes via Wifi.

However, I also have a pretty good understanding of what Apple's philosophy is and I also have my two feet planted firmly on the ground and I base my comments on reality, not on fantasy. People making ridiculous suggestions that they know will never happen is not called having an imagination, it's called being ridiculous.

I have repeatedly insisted that Apple isn't ready this year to release an iPad with a retina-like display. I would be thrilled to wind up being wrong and there has been so much pointing to a high resolution display that I guess it's reasonable to expect that I will be. Still, it would not be a shock, per se, if the display isn't as rumoured.

I have repeatedly insisted that Apple isn't ready this year to release an iPad with a retina-like display.

In what way (does this make any sense)? Other than supply of said panels, this doesn't make any sense to say. People expected it on the iPad 2, and that wasn't unreasonable, save for the EXTREME lack of supply.

A variety of efforts to duplicate Apple's success with iPad have failed, ranging from Microsoft's decade long Tablet PC, its 2006 Origami / UMPC project lead by Samsung, its 2010 Windows 7 Slate PC it partnered with HP to launch, HP's own Palm webOS based tablet last year alongside RIM's PlayBook and Google's Android 3.0 Honeycomb disaster, as well as third party attempts to turn Android 2.x smartphones into tablet-like devices.

...

Why is it necessary to include a slam on MS or anyone else in what is, otherwise, a positive article on the iPad?

I am as much an Apple fan as anyone... But I find that this sort of reporting lowers the value of the article to the prostituted bias of the author.

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -

"When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing;
when you see that money is flowing to those who deal not in goods, but in favors;
when you see that men get rich more easily by graft than by work, and your laws no longer protect you against them, but protect them against you.

you may know that your society is doomed."
- Ayn Rand -

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -

Funny, I was just thinking today how badly served we were by our last Fed chairman, the Objectivist who saw insane loosening of the financial ties-that-bind as only "irrational exhuberance."

Objectivists can recognize evil in social ties, but they see no good. They only use half their brains, the left hemisphere.

Back on topic, we are beginning to live in right-brain times -- again. (That's why there's a current reactionary revival of Ayn Rand-ism.) The new iPad screen is going to finish off the reign of the left brain that came in with the printed book.

The visual intensity of this new screen, moving pictures of ungodly clarity held in your hands, will turn everyone susceptible into "seers."

Hemispheric imbalance explains why Applephobic haters seem to be immune to the charms of the iPhone or the iPad. Their Aspergerish left brains do not want to lose control, to allow their sleeping right brains to be seduced into wakefulness. Ayn Rand would have been stuck with her PC still.

And yes, I can certainly be a dick when needed, but I am a dick who knows what they are talking about most of the time. I can also be a nice guy when needed, but nice guys usually don't get too far in life, so it is useful to be able to resort to dick mode when the situation demands it.

I'm gonna go with the crowd that thinks the new iPad HAS to have a higher-res screen.
I'd rather read on my iPhone than the iPad these days ... the retina display is just that much easier to read on, even at the smaller size!

From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, "Look at that!" -...

So, my assumption is that iOS wasn't designed for this kind of multi-threaded environment. And certainly no current apps can take advantage. Now maybe I am wrong about the way iOS is written, but it would seem to me that you would need an iOS update to come with a processor core change in order to take advantage, but as I said, I could be wrong.

iOS is fully multi-threaded and multi-tasking. Don't let the haters/fandroids convince you otherwise with their "at least Android has real multitasking" comments.

The only difference with iOS is Apple does not want Apps to have the ability to run continually in the background and so they have limited this in iOS. It's simply a decision on Apple's part and has nothing to do with iOS having an inferior architecture to Android or (like I've see some people suggest) that iOS is like old versions of Windows with cooperative multitasking. If Apple wanted to, they could implement multitasking Apps quite easily.

In fact, Android doesn't even have "true" multitasking, as the fandroids like to claim.

As to running on 4 cores vs 2, they would have to update iOS but I don;t think it would be a huge issue to do so.

The only difference with iOS is Apple does not want Apps to have the ability to run continually in the background and so they have limited this in iOS.

I think that it depends on the particular app, because I am able to run certain music apps at the same time. I can open a drum machine, start a beat and then close the app while the beat keeps playing. Then after that I can open up a synth app and start playing along to the beat which is still playing in the background from the other app.

I can also still keep talking on Skype when I switch to certain another apps.

I think that it depends on the particular app, because I am able to run certain music apps at the same time. I can open a drum machine, start a beat and then close the app while the beat keeps playing. Then after that I can open up a synth app and start playing along to the beat which is still playing in the background from the other app.

I can also still keep talking on Skype when I switch to certain another apps.

In order to allow Apps to perform background tasks Apple developed a set of services. Apps can call these services and request that certain specific tasks run in the background as opposed to the entire App running. This allows things like e-mail programs to finish sending e-mails or push notifications to get through.

Background audio and Voice over IP are two of these services, so it explains your music apps and Skype continuing to work.

A variety of efforts to duplicate Apple's success with iPad have failed, ranging from Microsoft's decade long Tablet PC, its 2006 Origami / UMPC project lead by Samsung, its 2010 Windows 7 Slate PC it partnered with HP to launch, HP's own Palm webOS based tablet last year alongside RIM's PlayBook and Google's Android 3.0 Honeycomb disaster, as well as third party attempts to turn Android 2.x smartphones into tablet-like devices.

This is really bad - even for AI.

How in the world did a product release a year ago attempt to duplicate a product released 2 years ago?

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

Maybe a larger display? I think the iPad 2 display is too small and I wouldn't mind something like a 12" display or a larger sized device, it sure would make the web browsing experience much better. Maybe something the size of a 13" - 15" MacBook Pro which would be much larger than the current model. The tiny screen of the iPad doesn't seem much better than my iPhone for web browsing, I still use my MacBooks and Desktops for web browsing anyways.

See, all this talk about the screen and rumors of going HiDPI for the other systems makes me wonder if Apple will finally give in and increase the screen size of the next iPhone (avoiding dead horse beating 101 folks). Apple is already above the level required for their Retina identification, so if they did increase the screensize, what resolution would they use? Would they maintain the same 3:2 ratio or move to a widescreen format?

Here is a bit of data I worked up keeping the same 3:2 ratios they currently have:

See, all this talk about the screen and rumors of going HiDPI for the other systems makes me wonder if Apple will finally give in and increase the screen size of the next iPhone (avoiding dead horse beating 101 folks). Apple is already above the level required for their Retina identification, so if they did increase the screensize, what resolution would they use? Would they maintain the same 3:2 ratio or move to a widescreen format?

Here is a bit of data I worked up keeping the same 3:2 ratios they currently have: